Debate contribution: End Israeli Impunity in Gaza
Debate contribution by Dr Steve Aiken OBE on .
- MLA
- Dr Steve Aiken OBE
- Party at the time
- Ulster Unionist Party
- Date
- 24 June 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- End Israeli Impunity in Gaza
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5047309
Read the official Assembly record
Text
On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Under Standing Order 13, I would like to make a point of order on the inclusion in the Order Paper of the private Members' motion entitled "End Israeli Impunity in Gaza". I wish you to adjudicate as to whether the motion is compatible with the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism that our Northern Ireland Assembly adopted on 27 April 2021. I believe that the motion is not compatible with the IHRA definition of antisemitism, and I respectfully wish that you judge on the motion.
94 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.38 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.43).
- Subject area: Religion and belief (including people of no religion), churches, faith communities and religious prejudice (including antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice).
- The overall probability was low and the text did not adopt any identity-based framing.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.25 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.05 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.15 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.13 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.40 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.29 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.38 | Between thresholds |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.43 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.32 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.16 |
| Adopts it | 0.09 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Religion and belief (including people of no religion), churches, faith communities and religious prejudice (including antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice) | 1.00 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:55 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.